DOCSLIB.ORG

Reflections on the Character and Career of Justice Mildred Lillie

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reflections on the Character and Career of Justice Mildred Lillie THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT Historical Society_ NEWSLETTER S PRI NG/SU MM E R 200} A Trailblazer: Reflections on the Character and r l fo und Justice Lillie they Career efJu stice Mildred Lillie tended to stay until retire­ ment. O n e of her fo rmer BY H ON. EARL JOH NSON, JR. judicial attorneys, Ann O ustad, was with her over Legal giant. Legend. Institution. 17'ailblazer. two decades before retiring. These are the words the media - and the sources Linda Beder had been with they quoted - have used to describe Presiding Justice her over sixteen years and Mildred Lillie and her record-setting fifty-five year Pamela McCallum fo r ten career as a judge and forty-four years as a Justice on the when Justice Lillie passed California Court of Appeal. Those superlatives are all away. Connie Sullivan was absolutely accurate and richly deserved. l_ _j h er judicial ass istant for I write from a different perspective, however - as a some eighteen years before retiring and O lga Hayek colleague of Justice Lillie for the entire eighteen years served in that role for over a decade before retiring, she was Presiding Justice of Division Seven. I hope to too. For the many lawyers who saw her only in the provide some sense of what it was like to work with a courtroom, Justice Lillie could be an imposing, even recognized giant, a legend, an institution, a trailblazer. intimidating figure. But within the Division she was Readers will be disappointed if they are expecting neither intimidating nor autocratic. Instead Justice what they typically see in the media. You know the Lillie led by example. She didn't care how other jus­ refrain - this revered public fi gure had a great public tices and their staffs did their work or when they did persona, and treated those who could help her career that work. She cared only that they worked - and pro­ with great charm and respect, but was abusive or worse duced opinions that were on time and of high quality. toward those who worked with or under her on a daily Hers were always that way. So she set the standard and basis. Nothing could be further from the truth when it you felt compelled to do the same. came to Justice Lillie. She was not only revered, but Those who saw her only in the courtroom, or when loved, by everyone in Division Seven. she delivered one of her many authoritative public This included the Division's staff, not just her fel­ speeches, may also be surprised to learn that within low justices. I asked our writ attorney, Pablo Drobny, Division Seven Justice Lillie always had an open mind who worked with her daily for those eighteen years, toward contrary views. If you drafted a dissent - even how they related. He gave an answer others, research in a case where she had written the original majority attorneys and legal assistants alike, would echo. "From opinion - you knew she would read and carefully pon­ the first day I entered Justice Lillie's chambers, I real­ der every word you wrote. Not frequently but more ized I was meeting with a legend. And we carried on often than any outsider would ever guess, Justice Lillie our discuss ions that way. But it wasn't long before would change her mind and either sign on to the dis­ there was a twinkle in her eye, and frequently a joke to sent or modify her own opinion to incorporate that be shared. And from then on I felt I was a friend and view. Understand, I was on the other side sometimes not just a writ attorney. Over the years that friendship when she rethought a case, although I also experienced just grew stronger and stronger." some shifts in my favor. But whichever way she ulti­ Justice Lillie was devoted to her personal staff - mately decided a close case, I knew it was based on a and they to her. Evidence of this can be fo und in their principled view of the law and I had only the greatest lengthy tenures with her. They may have had previous respect for her position. jobs with others on and off the court. Yet once they Justice Lillie had a special commitment to colle- NEW S LETTER· S PB.IN G/SU MMER 2003 giality. I have always suspected it was born of her own nor too old to master it, the others lacked any excuse early experiences as a new member of the appellate to remain computer illiterate. bench. When Justice Lillie first joined the Court of Another image is of her favorite question, some­ Appeal in 1958, she found herself a part of a three jus­ times raised at the beginning of a writ conference, tice division where the other two justices were curmud­ sometimes at the end, and more often both times: geons who disliked each other immensely. In fact, they "Have you heard the one about ... ?" There was always literally wouldn't talk with one another. All communi­ at least one of us who hadn't heard her latest joke. cations were in writing and not very kindly communi­ And, because she seemed to have an inexhaustible sup­ cations at that. ply, more often than not none of us had. Either way, As some indication of how bad it was, at the time we enjoyed the treat of listening to a master storyteller there was no Division Six to handle the three counties ply her trade. north of Los Angeles. So the Los Angeles divisions Another common phrase was "We need all the took turns traveling up to Santa Barbara to hear argu­ help we can get," typically made in response to an ments in the cases coming out of those counties. When attorney's request to file a supplemental brief or memo­ Division One's tum came up, neither of Justice Lillie's randum - a request she usually granted. But I also colleagues would dream of driving there in the same remember many times when Justice Lillie, with her car. And heaven forbid the young Justice Lillie would hand pounding her heart, sighed, "It doesn't get me travel with one of them. The other would see that as here," usually while we were reviewing a particularly favoritism and Justice Lillie would be perceived as a plaintive but unmeritorious plea in some writ petition. traitor. As a result, every time Division One had the The final image of my eighteen years with Justice Santa Barbara assignment, three separate cars drove Lillie is less happy, coming as it did when I visited her the ninety miles to that courtroom. at the hospital shortly before her death. Propped up on In large part because of these and like experiences, the tray table in her hospital room was a large frame. Justice Lillie came to Division Seven as its Presiding It contained a photo montage of the Los Angeles Justice with a commitment to colleagueship and what­ Superior Court from the period when she was a mem­ ever it took to avoid the devastating divisions she had ber of that court. Two things struck me immediately. experienced two decades earlier. And if that was her First, there were far fewer photographs in the dis­ goal she certainly succeeded. Division Seven was soon play than we would see today - a little over fifty judges engulfed in good feelings. Cakes and parties and jokes in contrast to the more than four hundred now on the helped. But more important was a respect for each oth­ Superior Court bench in Los Angeles. ers' views. Arguments and positions were not to be dis­ Even more striking, however, was the composition missed with a quick verbal quip at a conference. They of that court in the 19 50s. As best I could tell, they were to be fully developed in written memos as they were all white males - no African-Americans, no would be in an opinion and responded to the same Hispanics, no Asians. There were only two exceptions, way. This was calculated to lower the decibel level of Mildred Lillie and one other woman judge. This is the divisional conferences as well as to improve the intel­ Superior Court she entered in the early 1950s after lectual level of the dialogue. Justice Lillie was right on leaving an equally white male-dominated Municipal both counts. Court bench. From the perspective of 2003 we often Having spent over eighteen years working with forget how much has changed during the fifty-five years and under Justice Lillie in her role as Presiding Justice Justice Lillie served the judicial system in Los Angeles. of Division Seven, I can recall countless other images. Justice Lillie not only observed the changes that Shortly after the Second Appellate District computer­ brought racial, ethnic and gender diversity to the ized and before most justices, especially the veterans, bench, but took great pleasure in those changes as well. were personally using those fancy new machines, I It was a quiet pleasure, however. Hers was the role of remember walking into Justice Lillie's chambers. To the one who moves ahead alone and proves it can be my surprise, there she was pecking away at the comput­ done. This makes it possible for the settlers to follow, er, working on an opinion. I say "pecking," because the reading the marks on the trail, solidifying the gains and young Mildred Lillie had studiously avoided learning to publicly encouraging still others to stake out their touch type when in law school for fear she would be claim.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Spring / Summer 2003 Newsletter
    THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT Historical Society_ NEWSLETTER S PRI NG/SU MM E R 200} A Trailblazer: Reflections on the Character and r l fo und Justice Lillie they Career efJu stice Mildred Lillie tended to stay until retire­ ment. O n e of her fo rmer BY H ON. EARL JOH NSON, JR. judicial attorneys, Ann O ustad, was with her over Legal giant. Legend. Institution. 17'ailblazer. two decades before retiring. These are the words the media - and the sources Linda Beder had been with they quoted - have used to describe Presiding Justice her over sixteen years and Mildred Lillie and her record-setting fifty-five year Pamela McCallum fo r ten career as a judge and forty-four years as a Justice on the when Justice Lillie passed California Court of Appeal. Those superlatives are all away. Connie Sullivan was absolutely accurate and richly deserved. l_ _j h er judicial ass istant for I write from a different perspective, however - as a some eighteen years before retiring and O lga Hayek colleague of Justice Lillie for the entire eighteen years served in that role for over a decade before retiring, she was Presiding Justice of Division Seven. I hope to too. For the many lawyers who saw her only in the provide some sense of what it was like to work with a courtroom, Justice Lillie could be an imposing, even recognized giant, a legend, an institution, a trailblazer. intimidating figure. But within the Division she was Readers will be disappointed if they are expecting neither intimidating nor autocratic.
    [Show full text]
  • SILA May 2011 Newsletter
    May 2011 Vol 2, Issue 9 SI Los Angeles NEWS Fellowship with a purpose! Greetings! In This Issue Second Step Shelter Helps Women and Children Dear SILA Sisters, A Successful Joint Spring We have had a whirlwind month! It began Conference with our May 4 meeting during which we Meet Our New Members inducted two new members, Jessica Remembrance of Past Members: Washington and Bev Johnson. It was a Mildred Lillie lovely evening at Taix, with Daphyne Howell Keren Taylor's Continued Success from 1736 providing us information on the with WriteGirls current status of the shelter and its clients. It Summer Planning Retreat is always a treat to have her attend our meetings. If you can support the 1736 Member News: Mary Porter Family Crisis Center Day at the Races on June 18, please do so. I forwarded to you all the flyer. It would be Quick Links good if we have a presence at this activity. On May 18, our own Sheila Tatum presented an overview of the Spring Conference SILA's Website which was held May 13-15 in Carlsbad. Sheila did a fabulous job Camino Real Region as co-chair of this event with Desert Coast Region and it was a Federation (SIA) great success. The setting was beautiful, albeit a bit chilly, the International (SI) program was fulfilling and the vendors were supreme. I bought a hat from one of the vendors which won in a hat contest at another 2010-2011 Board event this past weekend!! Many thanks to our faithful SI vendor, Hazel's Bags President: Jeri Durham 1st VP (Programs): Ginger Cole Our June 1 meeting is our final Board/Business meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Choosing Justices: How Presidents Decide
    Saint Louis University School of Law Scholarship Commons All Faculty Scholarship 2011 Choosing Justices: How Presidents Decide Joel K. Goldstein Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/faculty Part of the Courts Commons, President/Executive Department Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons No. 2011-09 Choosing Justices: How Presidents Decide Forthcoming in Stetson Law Review Joel K. Goldstein Saint Louis University School of Law Choosing Justices: How Presidents Decide Joel K. Goldstein ∗ Vincent C. Immel Professor of Law Saint Louis University School of Law 314 ‐977 ‐2782 [email protected] ∗ Vincent C. Immel Professor of Law, Saint Louis University School of Law. An earlier version of this paper was presented as part of a panel discussion on selection of federal judges at the Southeastern Association of Law Schools annual meeting on August 7, 2009. I benefited from the discussion by my fellow panelists Bill Marshall and Ron Rotunda and by those in attendance. I am grateful to Mark Killenbeck and Brad Snyder for very helpful comments on a more recent draft and to Stacy Osmond for research assistance. i Choosing Justices: How Presidents Decide ABSTRACT Presidents play the critical role in determining who will serve as justices on the Supreme Court and their decisions inevitably influence constitutional doctrine and judicial behavior long after their terms have ended. Notwithstanding the impact of these selections, scholars have focused relatively little attention on how presidents decide who to nominate. This article contributes to the literature in the area by advancing three arguments. First, it adopts an intermediate course between the works which tend to treat the subject historically without identifying recurring patterns and those which try to reduce the process to empirical formulas which inevitably obscure considerations shaping decision.
    [Show full text]
  • Here Lies the Body of Mrs
    The cover: Gravestone, in Woodstock, Connec­ ticut. The full inscription reads: "Here lies the Body of Mrs. Abigail Paine, Relict Widow of Mr. Samuel Paine; She Died Jan. 13th 1752; in the 80th Year of Her Age." From Early New England Gravestone Rubbings, by Edmund Vincent Gillon, Jr. (Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1966), courtesy of Stanford University Art Library. Other examples of gravestone art appear with the article, "The Elu­ sive 'Right to Die'," beginning on page 16. ~l(,tt CONY 5 STANFORD LAWYER SPRING 1985 VOL. 19, NO.2 Editor: Constance Hellyer Associate Editor:10 Ann Coupal Graphic Design: Barbara Mendelsohn, Nancy Singer, Linda Ruiz Stanford Lawyer is published semiannually for alumnilae and friends of Stanford Law School. Cor­ respondence and materials for publi­ cation are welcome and should be sent to: Editor, Stanford Lawyer, Stanford Law School, Crown Quad­ Page 4 Page 10 Page 24 rangle, Stanford, CA 94305. Copy­ right 1985 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanfordlunior Uni­ versity. Reproduction in whole or in part, without permission of the pub­ FROM THE DEAN lisher, is prohibited. The Changing Law School Classroom 2 John Hart Ely FEATURE ARTICLES Reflections on the Burger Court 4 Gerald Gunther A Conversation with Pete McCloskey 10 The Elusive 'Right to Die' 16 Miehael Giljix AT ISSUE The Trouble with Libel Law 22 MareA. Franklin ALUMNI/AE WEEKEND 1984 24 SCHOOL NEWS 26 Faculty Notes 30 ALUMNI/AE NEWS Class Notes 32 In Memoriam 64 Alumnilae Gatherings 66 Coming Events Back cover 1 The first year of law school, most lawyers are not-and never, not once, was I ever though the object of endless called on by the judge to recite on a case other than the one facwty studies, is the one year I had fully prepared and was in the midst of trying.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction shortlisted, adj. qualified for a position but not selected from a list that creates the appearance of diversity but preserves the status quo As the New York Times reported in 1971, Mildred Lillie fortunately had no children. The article marveled at how she maintained “a bathing beauty figure” in her fifties.1 Lillie was not, however, featured in the news as a swimsuit model. Instead, she was shortlisted. President Richard Nixon had included her among six potential nominees on his list for the United States Su- preme Court. At the time, Lillie had served as a judge on California courts for more than twenty years. Her resume was as competitive if not more so than others on Nixon’s list. Lillie could have been the nation’s first female justice, but she was not chosen. Instead, Nixon claimed to care about diversity but preserved an all- male Court. This book exposes the potential harms of being shortlisted and of- fers inspiration for women to chart a path from shortlisted to selected in any career. Stories of women shortlisted for the Supreme Court illu- minate how this can be accomplished— their early successes in a world hostile to women offer excellent guidance for navigating the inequalities that endure in the #MeToo world. We share their stories and their col- lective strategies for moving from shortlisted to selected in the pages that follow. But first, back to the “bathing beauty,” the Honorable Mildred Lillie. The Times article provoked outrage on the opinion page even in that era. As one reader observed: 1 Jefferson_i_287.indd 1 4/9/20 11:04 AM 2 | Introduction To the Editor: Your description of the “qualifications” of Judge Mildred Loree Lillie (biographical sketches of Supreme Court nominees Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Nixon Legacy:The Burger and Rehnquist Courts, Selection of Supreme Court, and a Case Study—How Roe V. Wade Was Actual
    The Real Nixon Legacy: The Burger and Rehnquist Courts, Selection of Supreme Court, and a Case Study—How Roe v. Wade Was Actually Decided James D. Robenalt Thompson Hine LLP 3900 Key Center 127 Public Square Cleveland, OH 44114 (216) 566-5755 [email protected] James D. Robenalt is a partner and former chair of the Business Litigation group at Thompson Hine LLP’s Cleveland office. Since 2000, he has won major trials and arbitrations in complex litigation involving over $161 million. He has also defended major construction cases, tax cases and professional malpractice cases. Jim has partnered with John W. Dean, Nixon’s White House counsel, to create a national continuing education program entitled “The Watergate CLE.” Mr. Robenalt is a member of the Advisory Board for the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio. He is also an instructor for National Institute of Trial Advocacy. The Real Nixon Legacy: The Burger and Rehnquist Courts, Selection of Supreme Court, and a Case Study—How Roe v. Wade Was Actually Decided Table of Contents I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................5 II. Manuscript .....................................................................................................................................................5 Exhibit A .......................................................................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Rehnquist's Fourth Amendment: Be Reasonable
    REHNQUIST’S FOURTH AMENDMENT: BE REASONABLE Craig M. Bradley* INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 259 I. LIMIT THE DEFINITION OF “SEARCH” ............................. 266 II. LIMIT THE WARRANT REQUIREMENT ........................... 272 III. DILUTE THE CONTENT OF “PROBABLE CAUSE” ........... 278 IV. LIMIT THE APPLICATION OF THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE .................................................. 280 V. ENHANCE THE “STOP AND FRISK” POWER .................... 284 VI. ENCOURAGE CONSENT SEARCHES .............................. 286 VII. EMPLOY “STANDING” LIMITATIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS .............................................. 288 VIII. LIMIT POSTCONVICTION REMEDIES ......................... 291 IX. MISCELLANEOUS TECHNIQUES ................................... 292 CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 293 INTRODUCTION In a 1985 interview with the New York Times, (then) Justice Rehnquist described one of the achievements of the Burger Court, of which he had been a member for thirteen years, as “call[ing] a halt to a number of the sweeping rulings . of the Warren Court” in “the area of constitutional rights of accused criminal defendants.”1 While Rehnquist was pleased with the overall trend of the Burger Court’s criminal procedure decisions up to that point, the Court had not gone nearly as far as Rehnquist would have liked. * Craig M. Bradley, Robert A. Lucas Professor of Law, Indiana University, Bloomington. Thanks to Jim Tomkovicz and Yale Kamisar for their thoughtful comments on an earlier draft of this Article. This Article is drawn from Craig Bradley, The Fourth Amendment: Be Reasonable, in THE REHNQUIST LEGACY 81 (Craig Bradley ed., 2006). Reused with permission. 1 John A. Jenkins, The Partisan, N.Y. TIMES MAG., Mar. 3, 1985, at 28. 259 260 MISSISSIPPI LAW JOURNAL [VOL. 82:2 But in the latter years of his tenure as Chief Justice, the Court steered an even more moderate course.
    [Show full text]
  • University of California, Santa Barbara
    F O CA Y L IT I S F O R A R E N V I I A N LE , U T L University of California Santa Barbara IG T H T S H A E RE E A N B R T A A BARB Department of History Santa Barbara, California 93106-9410 Laura Kalman July 31, 2016 Dear Members of the NYU Legal History Colloquium: Thank you so much for agreeing to read my book manuscript! (And please do not copy, cite or circulate it without permission.) I have just submitted the manuscript (seconds ago) to Oxford for copy-editing, so I won’t be able to add any new chapters, based on what you tell me. But I will be able to make changes when the manuscript comes back from the copy-editor and before I submit the final version. It would ideal if you could make your criticisms as targeted/specific as possible so I know what to fix, massage, rewrite, add, delete, etc. But whatever you say, I really look forward to being with all of you again. Best wishes, Laura Kalman, Professor of History, UCSB 2 Colloquium on Constitutional & Legal History NYU School of Law August 31, 2016 The Long Reach of the Sixties: LBJ, Nixon and Supreme Court Nominations Laura Kalman [email protected] 805-453-8673 3 In Memory Of Newton Kalman, 1920-2010 Celeste Garr, 1924-2010 John Morton Blum, 1921-2011 Lee Kalman, 1919-2014 Protectors, Promoters, Teachers, Friends 4 Preface On February 13, 2016, friends found the body of the Supreme Court’s preeminent conservative in his suite at a hunting resort in West Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rehnquist Choice
    Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 53 Issue 1 Article 9 2002 The Rehnquist Choice John P. Frank Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation John P. Frank, The Rehnquist Choice, 53 Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 243 (2002) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev/vol53/iss1/9 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Case Western Reserve Law Review by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. BOOK REVIEW THE REHNQUIST CHOICE BY JOHN W. DEAN NEW YORK: THE FREE PRESS, 2001 PP. ix, 333, $26.00 Reviewed by John P. Frankt This book is drawn from real conversations on a big subject. John Dean, as the older of us will recall from the Watergate hearings, was a central figure on the Nixon staff. He was deeply involved in the Nixon efforts to achieve a "conservative Court." And Nixon had many opportunities. The first Nixon appointee was Chief Justice Burger. The story of that appointment is briefly but well told. Attorney General Mitchell, deeply involved in all of the Nixon appointments, said, "Burger's the first guy to run for the job of a Chief Justice - and get it." This appointment was easy for Nixon; it was, he said, "The most personal of [my] presidency to date."2 Then came difficulty. The President, at Burger's nudging, se- lected Judge Clement F.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court [Mostly Sandra Day O'connor Nomination] (1) Box: 37F
    Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Fielding, Fred: Files Folder Title: Supreme Court [Mostly Sandra Day O'Connor Nomination] (1) Box: 37F To see more digitized collections visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ THE WHITE WASHJ HOUSE NGTON 1726B DISTRICT OF ·coLUMBIA STEIN, MITCHELL & MEZINES {Continued) United States District Court for the District of Maryland, 1971-1972. Adjunct Professor-of Law, Columbia to Revise the Local Rules, 1973-. Mem­ Washington College of Law, American University, ber: Judicial Council, District of Columbia Circuit, 1973-1974. Member, Advisory Committee on 1968-; Committee to Draft Maryland Civil Jury Civil Rules, 1978-1979. Member: The District Instructions, 1977. Member: The District of Co­ of Columbia Bar; Montgomery County, Maryland lumbia Bar; Bar Association of the District of Co­ State and American Bar Associations ; Association lumbia (Member, Board of Governors, 1966-; Vice of . Plaintiff's Trial Attorneys of Metropolitan President, 1967-1968; President, 1968-1969; Mem­ Washington, D. C. (Vice President, 1977-1978; ber, Committee on Grievances and Admissions, U .S. President, 1978-1979). • Court of Appeals, 1970-1974); Maryland State and American Bar Associations-~ The Association of Michael G. Charapp, born Pittsbur:gh, Pennsyl­ Trial Lawyers of America (Member, Board of Gov­ vania, May 11, 1949; admitted to bar, 1974, Vir­ ernors, 1960); Association of Plaintiffs Trial At­ ginia; 1975, District of Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION Craig M. Bradley
    Cambridge University Press 0521859190 - The Rehnquist Legacy Edited by Craig M. Bradley Excerpt More information INTRODUCTION Craig M. Bradley William Hubbs Rehnquist was born on October 1, 1924, and grew up in Milwau- kee, Wisconsin. His father worked as a wholesale paper salesman, and his mother was a homemaker. After briefly attending Kenyon College in Ohio, he joined the Army Air Corps and was stationed in North Africa as a weather observer until the conclusion of World War II. Disdaining the midwestern climate after his ex- perience in North Africa, he attended Stanford University, where he received a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in Political Science. He moved on to get a mas- ter’s degree from Harvard, with an eye toward an academic career in Political Science. However, he became disenchanted with academics and decided to be- come a lawyer instead. To that end, he returned to Stanford and finished first in his class at Stanford Law School in December of 1951. (Future Justice Sandra Day was third). In those days, a trip to Washington from California to interview for a Supreme Court clerkship was unthinkable, even for someone who was first in his class, and Rehn- quist had not received an offer from Justice Douglas, who recruited in the West. However, as luck would have it, Justice Robert Jackson came to Stanford to ded- icate a new Law School building. Phillip Neal, a former Jackson clerk who taught at Stanford, asked Rehnquist if he would like to interview with Jackson. Rehn- quist readily accepted and was offered the job.
    [Show full text]
  • Fielding, Fred: Files Folder Title: Supreme Court, Alphabetical Incomings and Outgoing, 1981 (8) Box: 37F
    Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Fielding, Fred: Files Folder Title: Supreme Court, Alphabetical Incomings and Outgoing, 1981 (8) Box: 37F To see more digitized collections visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ C A-NOERSC N b39 EAST AVE '.~ (•... ;! BAYHEAC ~J 08742 ( G 4•003701S170 Ob/19/81 ICS IP~MTZZ CSP WSHB 201892~93c MGM TDMT BAYrEAO NJ 68 Ob•1~ 073cA EST ( C-• ( PRESloENT RUNALo REAGAN WHITE: HOUSE WASHINGTON DC 20505 ( ( I c l DEAR PRESICENT REAGA~, ~ I STROt-.GL Y URGE YOU TO APPO II\ T JUqGE FRED LACE _ 0 __ NEW JERSEY . TO ( REPLACE JUSTICE STEWART, JWOGE LAC • - - OUTST NDI"G CONSTITUTIO~AI,, JURIST WITr- AN ENVIABLE RE::CORO AS FEDERAL JUDGE lN DIFFICULT c•sES .. AND PREVIO~SLY FEDERAL PROSECUTOR IN NEW JERSEY, I AM CERTAIN . HE C WOULD BE W~RMLY . APPROVED ~y CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER . CLIFFORD ANOEHSUN BAYHEAD "E~ JERSEY ( 07:~8 EST MG~COMP ( C (_ ( C ( (_. (_ l l t :; N IO ... :,,. TO REPLY BY MAILGRAM, SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR WESTERN UNION'S TOLL - FREE PHONE NUMBERS THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON July 30, 1981 Dear Mr. Hotchkis: Thank you for your letter of July 1, 1981 to the President recommending the Honorable MiI red L. Lillie to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court of the United States created by the announcement of the retirement of Associate Justice Potter Stewart.
    [Show full text]